a) You are already allowed to kill off your own characters.b) No, that's not much better because someone else took your character and killed him/her off in a way that's supposed to be canon, preventing anyone from using him/her short of a miraculous resurrection.

I believe it's more of a case of both conditions being satisfied at once. Plus, as it stands now, you can kill your own characters off if done so in the same game they were introduced, but not if they then become an established character.

I think if you create the character it should be yours to do away with regardless of timeline. Also, I think if the game designer gets the permission of the creator to kill off a character they should be able to do so, but not otherwise. Granted, this poses some problems when the creator cannot be found but it presents the fairest way of handling things. Another option is to include some kind of activity deadline where if the original creator has disappeared from sight for a year or more and cannot be reached their characters revert to 'public domain' or can become adopted by someone else.

(a) becomes problematic if the character has been around for a long time and especially if he also appears in games made by other people.

(b) has the obvious problem that it's not always possible to tell objectively whether something was done for story reasons or for shock reasons.

In cooperative stories, any big change to an established character is potentially going to cause strife and dissent, and you can't hope to prevent that by writing down a handful of neat rules or exceptions.

Death is just the biggest example; I would likewise expect mixed reactions if some new game declared that some well-established character is now married, or converted to some overly strict religion, or revealed to have been an alien all along. I'm not saying that any of these are necessarily bad, but it should be obvious that they're all potentially problematic.

I think that RoN can easily be compared to a weekly show of some sort, so why not follow those kind of rule? I mean by that: all is allowed as long as everything is set back to normal at the end of the "episode\game". And for major modification (a character gets maried, is an alien etc) would have to be specificaly requested for and permited by a comity or some sort (a few members could be elected for that or simple plain "the whole forum"). That is a way to be sure that there is no "ABSOLUTE" rules and that some exceptions can still happen.

Or how about people ask here in the forum, when they want to kill a character, if anyone has a problem with it?I mean, if no one develops a game where the character is needed, or if there's no conflict with the timeline, then what the heck?Davy Jones permanent death might not have been to bad I think, since he got so overused. I say this while I probably will still use Davy Jones myself in a game I plan, though not really him. Hard to explain.

I don't see why we still need the death clause.It made sense when there were a lot of games being made, but right now anything that deters someone from working in RotN seems like a bad thing.I really don't care if someone kills the entire town in a game. Another author can just ignore that plot, or set it earlier, or <insert any number of rationalizations>.

I don't see why we still need the death clause.It made sense when there were a lot of games being made, but right now anything that deters someone from working in RotN seems like a bad thing.

But would not having the death clause deter others from making a RON game, for fear that a character they were planning to use will end up dead before they finish their game, and invalidate their idea? I mean, it's all very well to say they can set their game first in the chronology, or whatever, but--

Eh, okay, I guess you're probably right; I'm just a little worried because I had plans for making a RON game myself after I finish at least one other AGS game first, and I don't want to have my plans spoiled because a character that was going to play a central role in my game was killed off. But, eh, maybe you're right that it's time to reevaluate.

(For the record, the characters I had plans for in my game so far (unless I'm forgetting one) are Davy Jones, Elandra, the Bum (of course -- everyone uses the Bum), Baron Wolfgang, Chef Lucca, Guido, Mr. Namyah, the Sheriff, Esmarilda Cragglerock, and, in his triumphant return after not having been seen since the third game in the series, Moboski. So as long as none of them get killed off, I'm happy. (Actually there are a couple of other existing characters I was also planning to use, but I'm pretty sure nobody's going to kill them off seeing as they're already dead...))

I don't want to have my plans spoiled because a character that was going to play a central role in my game was killed off.

My point was(a) That's pretty unlikely to happen given the current rate of releases(b) Who cares if a character dies in the game before yours? This is not a serious series."Aren't you dead?""Who, me? No. Where did you get that idea?""Well... I'm pretty sure I had to scrape your liquidized brainstem off my passenger seat last week.""I think I would remember that. Or at least the moment leading up to it.""But... I KNOW you're dead.""You're starting to creep me out. I think you should stop talking now."